Papal possessions in the eastern Adriatic
Ante ŠKEGRO
Izvleček
V korespondenci dveh rimskih škofov, Vigilija (537-555) in Gregorija Velikega (590-604), je mogoče najti podatke o patri-moniju sv. Petra v Praevalitani (Patrimonium Praevalitanum), v Dalmaciji (Dalmatiarum Patrimonium, Patrimonium in Dal-matia) in v Istri skupaj z Raveno (Patrimonium Ravennate et Histrianum). Upravitelji patrimonija sv. Petra v Dalmaciji (rectores) so bili tudi papeški odposlanci v dijecezi Salona (tj. Dalmacija). Kot papeški zastopniki, čeprav so spadali med nižje cerkvene redove, so imeli izjemno oblast nad dalmatinskimi duhovniki. Od konca 6. st. v virih ni več sledov o papeških patri-monijih na vzhodnojadranski obali. Kakorkoli že, ni povsem jasno ali so te posesti obstajale tudi v naslednjih stoletjih. Še vedno ostaja odprto vprašanje, ali so, ali niso dohodki s teh posesti služili tudi za odkup ujetnikov in sužnjev po Dalmaciji in Istri v času vladanja papeža Ivana IV (640-642). Iz istega razloga ni jasne slike, kdaj in kako so rimski papeži izgubili svoje posesti na vzhodnojadranski obali.
Ključne besede: vzhodni Jadran, Dalamcija, Praevalitana, Salona, papeška posest, papež Vigilij, papež Gregor Veliki
Abstract
In the correspondence of two Roman bishops, Vigilius (537555) and Gregory the Great (590-604), one can find information about the Patrimony of St. Peter in Praevalitana (patrimo-nium Praevalitanum), in Dalmatia (Dalmatiarum patrimonium, Patrimonium in Dalmatia) and in Istria together with Ravenna (patrimonium Ravennate et Histrianum). Administrators of the Patrimony of St. Peter in Dalmatia (rectores) were also papal legates in the diocese of Salona (i.e. Dalmatia). As papal representatives, although they ranked among the minor Church orders, they had extraordinary authority over the Dalmatian clerics. From the end of the 6th century there is no more trace in the sources of the papal Patrimonies on the eastern Adriatic coast. However, it is not quite clear whether these estates existed also in the following centuries. The question about whether or not the income from these estates served also for buying back captives and slaves throughout Dalmatia and Istria in the reign of Pope John IV (640-642), still remains open. By the same token, there is no clear picture about when and how the Roman Popes lost their estates on the eastern Adriatic coast.
Key words: Eastern Adriatic, Dalmatia, Praevalitana, Salona, Papal possession, Pope Vigilius, Pope Gregory
INTRODUCTION
"Saint Peter's patrimony (Latin: Patrimonium sancti Petri), the Roman bishop's territory, became, after the invasion of barbarians and the disappearance of the Western Roman Empire, the Papal States. This neglected Byzantine ducat was renovated by Pope Gregory the Great (further in the text, Pope Gregory) at the end of the 6th and the beginning of the 7th century." This is all that could be read about the Papal possessions or Saint Peter's patrimony in the recently published Opci religijski
leksikon (General Lexicon of Religion).1 In antiquity great territories were defined as patrimonium..2 As it could be seen, the Papal possessions on the Croatian territory are not even mentioned. No better information about Saint Peter's patrimony in the Eastern Adriatic could be found in general encyclopaedias and lexicons.3 The exception is The Catholic Encyclopaedia that quotes Dalmatian (patrimonium Dalmatianum) and Illyric (patrimonium Illyricanum) possessions which disappeared during the Avar and Slavic invasions.4 The Papal Dalmatian possessions (dalmatinische Güttern) in
1	Opči religijski leksikon. A-Ž (Zagreb 2002) 697.
2	Kränzlein 1965, 493-502.
3	Noble 1993, 1791-1793; Hamman 1992; Gatz 1997, 5862; Gregory I., The Encyclopedia of Religion. Vol. 6 (New York, London 1987) 118-121.
4	Al di la dell'Adriatico si trovavano il patrimonium Dalmatianum ed il patrimonium Illyricanum, certo ridotti a ben poca cosa o gia scomparsi per le offese di Avari e di Slavi: Bertolini 1952, 958-959.
relation to the dispute of the Holy Chair's patrimony are sporadically mentioned by H. Grisar.5 Saint Peter's patrimony in Dalmatia is also mentioned by John Wilkes in his monograph on Roman Dalmatia, but only in the context of disputes in Salona's Church during the last two decades. He wrongly concluded that the first mention of Papal Dalmatian possessions dated from the time of Pope Gregory (590-604).6 The Papal possessions, or Saint Peter's patrimony in Dalmatia, as an already constituted territory, are mentioned at the time of the controversial Pope Vigilius (537-555),7 who was collecting annuity from them.8
THE FORMATION OF PAPAL POSSESSIONS OR PATRIMONIUM SANCTI PETRI
According to the results of past investigations, Papal possessions or Patrimonium sancti Petri consisted of large land properties, sacral and residential buildings as well as outbuildings.9 Very often they were donated. The greatest donors were some Roman emperors as well as the Byzantine ones. At the end of the antiquity and the beginning of the Middle Ages the Papal possessions were scattered all over Italy (Patrimonium Urbanum, Patrimonium Ligurias, Patrimonium Alpium Cottiarum, Patrimonium Ravennate et Histrianum, patrimonium Piceni, Patrimonium Tusciae, Patrimonium Sabin-
ense et Carseolanum, patrimonium Appiae, patrimonium Camponiae, patrimonium Samniticum, patrimonium Apuliae et Calabriae, patrimonium Lucaniae et Bruttiorum), in Sicily (patrimonium Panormitanum, patrimonium Siracusanum), in Sardinia (patrimonium Sardiniae), in Corsica (patrimonium Corsicanum), in south Gaul (patrimo-nium Galliae, Gallicanum), around Hippo in north Africa (patrimonium Africae, Germanicianum) etc.10 From the correspondence of Popes Vigilius and Gregory, we can learn that Papal possessions also existed in Dalmatia (Dalmatiarum patrimonium, patrimonium in Dalmatia) and in Praevalitana (patrimonium Praevalitanum).^^ The Papal patrimony in Istria is related, in not very clear context, to the patrimony of Ravenna (patrimonium Ravennate et Histrianum).1^ The patrimony of Ravenna (patrimonium ecclesiae Ravennatis), to my knowledge for the time being, is mentioned only in a letter of Pope Gregory from 595.13
In donating to the Church, the emperor Con-stantine the Great (306-337) was very generous. During his reign, Pope Silvester (314-335) became the owner of the possessions in Italy, Sicily, An-tiochia, Alexandria, Asia Minor, Africa, Armenia, Mesopotamia, etc.14 Following Constantine's example, donations were also made to the Church by some of his successors and other distinguished persons who lived in his time and the following period.15 From Constantine's time the Church
5	Grisar 1877, 356-357.
6	Wilkes 1969, 434: "At the same time Gregory (Pope) requested the prefect of Illyricum Jovinus to attempt a restoration of some order in the area. He was instructed to appoint a new administrator for the patrimony of st Peter (the first reference to such property) in Dalmatia, since the earlier administrator, Bishop Malchus of Delminium, was in league with Natalis. Malchus was summoned to Rome to give an account of his activities, and he remained there until his death".
7	Mansi 1960, 355; Migne 1848, epist. XIV, 46; CD, I, p. 4-5, Nr. VII; Ivanisevic 1994, 162: "Postea vero ut a nobis ad Dalmatiarum patrimonium mittereris, summis precibus postulasti. Quod nos securi, quia talem feceras cautionem, animo libenti concessimus. Qui dum in Salonitanam urbem pro ordinatione patrimonii advenisses, quantum ad nos postea est plurimorum relatione perductum, illicitis te et a sede apostolica prohibitis ordinationibus miscuisti, et quos Honorius, tunc praedicatae civitatis episcopus, contra consuetudinem Romanae vel suae ecclesiae, sedis apostolicae constituta sacris ordinibus applicaverat, non solum prohibere penitus noluisti, sed nec nobis ex hac causa vel scripto referre, vel quando Thessalonicae nobis occurreras, memor conscientiae tuae, ne verbo quidem suggerere voluisti, et cum illis, tanquam cum legitimo et rationabili ordine factis, cupiditatis spiritu acquievisti procedere, et eorum socius es communionis venalitate repertus. Iterum Thessalonica ad Dalmatias patrimonii regendi causa remissus es, ex qua provincia frequenti te auctoritate monuimus, ut non ante discederes, nisi omnes secundum pollicitationem tuam tam de Dalmatiarum patrimonio quam de Praevalitano colligeres pensiones. Sed tu, omnia pratermittens, ad Constantinopolitanam urbem pro solo faciendo venire scandalo festinasti, quantum et sequens exitus declaravit".
8	Škegro 2001a, 9-13; Id., 2001, 147-171; Id., 2000, 23-37; Id., 2001a, 9-28; Id., 2002, 76-93.
9	Spearing 1918, pass.
10	Grisar 1877, 321-360; 524-564; Spearing 1918, pass.; Bertolini 1952, 958; Noble 1993, 1792-1793; Duffy 1999, 50
n Škegro 2000, 23-37; Škegro 2001a, 9-28; Škegro 2001, 147-171.
12	Bertolini 1952, 958.
13	CCSL, CXL, V, 21, p. 289: Gregorius Severo, episcopo Ficulino, visitatori ecclesiae Ravennae: Obitum Johannis antistitis directa relatio patefecit. Quapropter visitationis destitutae ecclesiae fraternitati tuae operam sollemniter delegamus. Quam ita te convenit exhibere, ut nihil de provectionibus clericarum, reditu, ornatu ministeriisque vel quicquid illud est in patrimonio eiusdem a quoquam praesumatur ecclesiae et cetera secundum morem.
14	Duchesne 1955, 170-178.
15	Nikolajevic 1971, 277-292.
became one of the leading proprietors in the West.16 Sometimes the Church gained the ownership of some imperial buildings, especially during the rule of the emperors Valentinian I (364-375) and Valens (364-378). Such is the case with the former palace of Diocletian's co-ruler Galerius (293-311) in Gamzigrad near Zaječar in north eastern Serbia (Felix Romuliana).1'7 An inscription from Izbičanj near Prijepolje in south west Serbia gives evidence that during the rule of the emperor Justinian (527565) other buildings, such as palaces, wells, stables, thermae etc, as well as the sacral ones became Church property.18
At the end of the 5th and the beginning of the 6th century, the Church in Dalmatia became the owner of large buildings and residentaial areas, like the one in Mogorjelo near Čapljina in west Herzegovina.19 It is known that Salona's (arch)-diocese was one of the richest churches in Dal-matia. That is proved not only by the fact that its properties (ecclesiastica praedia) were discussed at the Salona synod in 530,20 but also by the fact that a special official (procurator Ecclessiae Saloni-
tanae) was nominated to administrate them.21 In the area of Dalmatia and Pannonia, the officials of the same denomination headed the administration for mineral exploiting,22 and at the end of antiquity they also supervised some manual trade in the Salona area (procurator gynaecii Bassian-ensis, Pannoniae Secundae translati Salonis; procurator gynaecii Savensi, Dalmatiae Aspalato; procurator bafii salonitani, Dalmatiae).^^ In Istria they administrated imperial and other large properties.24 From 552 to 564 there was a litigation over the possessions of the Salona Church in which the notary of the Salona Church (notarius sanc-tae Ecclesiae Salonitanae) was involved.25 Some distinguished church and state persons illicitly encroached upon those possessions. The Saloni-tan Archbishop Natalis (around 580-592) himself was involved in the alienation of the material goods of the Salona Church and he was charged for it.26 These possessions were encroached upon by the administrator of the Papal Dalmatian patrimony Malchus (+594),27 who is said to be the first or one of the first bishops of the so-called
16	Duffy 1999, 50.
17	Srejovic 1983, pass; Srejovic 1989, pass.
18	Vulic 1931, 332; Vulic 1941-1948, 330; Mirkovic 1978, 1-8; ILIug. 1735: + Omnia quae cernis magno constructa labore / moenia, templa, domus, fontes, stabula, atria, thermas / auxilio Crristi (!) paucis construxit in annis / antistes Stefanus (!) sub principe Iustiniano.
19	Marijanovic 1990, 110-120.
20	Šišic 1914, 158; Klaic 1967, 78; Gunjača 1973, 51; Ivaniševic 1994, 160: "Statuimus quoque secundum patrum curam ecclesiastica predia donandum atque venendum nullatenus esse licentiam; comutandum quoque similiter damnantes arbitrium nisi pro ecclesie compendiis fieri apud eas personas et eo ordine, quod in mutuanda pecunia memoravimus fuerit conprobatum, ut, omni utilitatis ratione perpensa, episcopi presbiteris suis tribuant facultatem. Ipsis vero utilitate cognita, ab archiepiscopo concedendum, ne aliter factum obtinet firmitatem et presumptum, personas abdicare cogatur ecclesia".
21	Marasovic, Zekan 1982, 118, Tab. III, 1; Škegro 2001b, 22; Škegro 2002a, 413: D[ep]ositio / Felic[i p]rocura[t]ori / Ec(c)les[ia]e
Saloni[ta]nae / Dedit mem(orimam) d(omini) n(ostri)?A?[--]/ 5qvi v[ix]it anni[s -]M. L?/ ut [-]pii? -M- [-]osimi / -CIA?[-?]-
E Domnic[ae] uxori / mea[e] mecum —[—?]I— / qvi[—?]OI verit(a—?) NO[—?]—.
22	Mocsy 1974, 133; Škegro 1999, 39-138; Škegro 2000, 69-176.
23	Not. dign. Occ. XI, 46, 48, 66.
24	Starac 1994, 133-145; Starac 1999, 83; Matijašic 1998, 15-22; Matijašic 1996, 171-188.
25	Ivaniševic 1994, 170: "[-------][-----]p[-][---]rum [-]strorum su[-][-]ntur p[-] ecclesiae Salonitanae in[-][-] oportet n[os a]lteras adhuc largiri in[-][-]quam[-]etis nostris pro parte ecc[l-] aestima[-] in eorum repperiuntur s[—] Laurentius, notar(ius) s(an)c(t)e eccl(esiae) S[al—] [—]ri si qua pro partibus vestri[s —] [—]pisse ob repetitione r[—][—]m promissis chartulis g[—][—]enter quidem et ut arbi[—][—]lo potestati ut fides eor[—/'.
26	CCSL, CXL, II, 19 p. 106: "Quem Honoratum archidiaconem arbitramur antistiti suo aliunde displicere non potuisse, nisi quod eum vasa sacra suis dare parentibus prohibebat. Quam causam subtili voluimus et tunc sanctae memoriae decessor meus et nunc ego indagatione discutere. Sed is ipse suorum sibi actuum conscius personam ad iudicium postposuit destinare".
27	Farlati 1753, 230-231; Mansi 1960, 1126; Migne 1849, epist. XXII (640); Bulic 1904, 26-27; CCSL, CXL, III, 22, p. 168: "Talem ergo, te imminente debent, personam eligere, quae nullius incongruae voluntati deserviat, sed vita et moribus decorata tanto ordini digna valeat inveniri. De rebus vero vel ornamento eiusdem ecclesiae fideliter rerum inventarium facito te praesente conscribi. Et ne de rebus ipsis possit aliquid deperire, Respectum diaconem atque Stephanum primicerium notariorum ut ipsarum rerum omnino gerant custodiam admoneto, interminans eis de propria eos satisfacturos esse substantia, si quicquam exinde eorum neglegentia fuerit immi-nutum. Malchum autem fratrem et coepiscopum nostrum contestari te volumus ut se penitus in hac causa non misceat. Nam si per eum aliquid contra voluntatem nostram factum vel temptatum potuerimus addiscere, non modicam ad se culpam et periculum pertinere cognoscat. Sed et hoc eum admonere curato ut ad ponendas explendasque rationes patrimonii nostri quod gessit debeat esse sollicitus, pro quibus etiam faciendis ex Siciliae partibus ad nos, postpoposita excusatione, venire festinet. In rebus igitur Salonitanae ecclesiae nullomodo se miscere praesumat, ne amplius ei aut obnoxius aut possit esse culpabilis. Nam multa habere de rebus praedictae fertur ecclesiae, eumque opinio pene auctorem exstitisse in venditione rerum eius vel aliis illicitis asseverat. Quod si ita esse sicut dicitur manifesta veritate patuerit, certus sit inultum hoc nullatenus remanere".
Delminium diocese,28 and sometimes he was said to be a special bishop of Dalmatia in the time of Pope Gregory.29 In 598 the possessions of the Salona Church were encroached upon by the Byzantine proconsul of Dalmatia (proconsul Dalmati-ae) Marcellin.30
DALMATIAN AND PRAEVALITAN PAPAL POSSESSIONS
1. The time of Pope Vigilius
The earliest reports on Dalmatian and Praeval-itan Papal possessions were recorded in 550, in Pope Vigilius's letter to his deacons Rusticus and Sebastian. In a short extract of that letter a reference is made to Dalmatian patrimony (Patrimonium Dalmatiarum), patrimony (Patrimonium), Dalmatian patrimony (Patrimonium Dalmatiarum) once again, and finally to Dalmatian and Praeval-itan patrimony together (Dalmatiarum Patrimonium quam Praevalitanum).^1 From this source it is impossible to define the exact location of Dalmatian and Praevalitan Papal possessions, its structure and its size. In the middle of the 6th century, Dalmatian great properties on islands and on the coast were composed of various farms.32 On two occasions, Sebastian, a deacon from the nearest milieu of Pope Vigilius, was entrusted with the administration of Dalmatian properties (ordina-tio patrimonii) by him. As is known, the deacons were in charge of church properties from the earliest time.33 Even so, on various occasions the Pope
was forced to warn his deacon to collect revenues (pensiones) from Dalmatian and the Praevalitan patrimony and to bring them to Thessalonica. At that time the Pope stayed in Thessalonica under the order of the emperor Justinian and his governor in Rome, the commander-in-chief Narses.34
From this, as well as from other sources, it is impossible to comprehend why the administration of the Dalmatian and Praevalitan patrimony was always entrusted to the same person,35 who was regularly sent to Salona (in Salonitanam urbem) in order to undertake a commitment. Does not this fact indicate a possibility that in the middle of the 6th century the Dalmatian Papal patrimony was situated somewhere around Salona, as Grisar himself indicates?36 The fact that the administrator of the Dalmatian Papal patrimony was at the same time its representative in Salona's church supports this argument. Testifying in favour of such a possibility are also the Pope's reproofs addressed to the deacon Sebastian, because he did not reveal unauthorized ordainments, nor did he stop them. Such a possibilitty is further supported by the administrators of the Dalmatian Papal patrimony from the time of Gregory and its representatives (responsales) in the Salona Church, or Dalmatian Church, who mostly stayed in the area of Salona.
The fact that Pope Vigilius entrusted the same person, who also headed the Dalmatian patrimony with the administration and collection of revenues from the Praevalitan patrimony, could support the presumption that the Praevalitan patrimony in the middle of the 6th century was not very
28	Škegro 2000a, 108-112; Škegro 2000b, 23-37.
29	Antoljak 1992, 50, n. 103.
30	CCSL, CXL A, IX, 159, p. 718: "Vos enim tanti mali de causa Maximi omnes astruunt auctores existere, per quos spoliatio illius ecclesiae vel tantarum animarum perditio atque inauditae praesumptionis audacia sumpsit initium".
31	See note 7.
32	Marini 1805, No. 78; Nikolajevic 1971, 290, sl. 3: "[---] Item [prae]cipio ut in [in]sula [Meli]tense dentur per suprascriptum [— ] luminaria per omnes Dei sacras ecclesias vel qui ad ipsam diocesen pertinent solidi centum & ad pauperes om[nes] in pd. In insula solidi centum similiter volo ut dentur in castella qui sunt super civitatem Salonitanam tam in luminaria sacrarum ecclesiarum quam ad pauperes id est Asinio: Tilu(a) [-] bielio. Gennes(r) [-] una cum alis: pulta: seu elu(a)r(s)a: solidi centum s(r) [—] vero excepte quod in anteriore mea deliberavi volun[tatem] ad libertos meos quam ad alios vel quod in praesentes codicellos meos pro remedio anime meae etiam in luminaria vel ad pauperes dandum deliber[avi et quan]ti remanserint in auro solidi volo ut omnes pro redemptione captivo[rum ---/'.
33	Actus apostolorum, 6, 1-6: "In diebus autem illis, crescente numero discipulorum, factus est murmur Hellenistarum adversus Hebraeos, eo quod neglegerentur in ministerio cotidiano viduae eorum. Convocantes autem Duodecim multitudinem discipulorum, dixerunt: "Non est aequum nos derelinquentes verbum Dei ministrare mensis; considerate vero, frateres, viros ex vobis boni testimonii septem plenos Spiritu et sapientia, quos constituemus super hoc opus; nos vero orationi et ministerio verbi instantes erimus". Et placuit sermo coram omni multitudine, et elegerunt Stephanum, virum plenum fide et Spiritu Sancto, et Philippum et Prochorum et Nicanorem et Timonem et Parmenam et Nicolaum proselytum Antiochenum, quos statuerunt ante conspectum apostolorum, et orantes imposu-erunt eis manus.
34	Mercier 2001, 121-122.
35	In the 2nd and 3nd century imperial properties in Istria and in Dalmatia had one administrator (procurator patrimonii / rationis privatae). CIL XI 2698; CIL II 2643 + AE 1985, 374; CIG 3751; Starac 1994, 142, 143.
36	Grisar 1877, 357.
large. Ceding the administration of the Praevali-tan patrimony to the same person who was at the head of the Dalmatian patrimony might also have been caused by practical reasons. If this administrator had not travelled by sea37 to Salona - passing through Scodra, the administrative38 and church centre of Praevalitana -39 could not have been avoided.40 The Bishop of Scodra, Stephanus was mentioned in 591 in a letter from Pope Gregory in the context of the administrator of the Dalmatian Papal patrimony.41
2. The time of Pope Gregory the Great
Papal possessions in Dalmatia were mentioned five times in the correspondence of Pope Gregory from 592 to 594. For the first time they are mentioned in the Pope's letter addressed to the Byzantine prefect of Illyricum (praefectus praeto-rio Illyrici) Jobinus in March of 592. Giving compliments on the return of stability to Illyricum after barbarian devastation, the Pope recommended a new administrator of the Dalmatian patrimony to the Byzantine official.42 It is known from the Pope's letter of March of 593, addressed to the vicedea-con Antoninus that the new administrator of the Dalmatian Papal patrimony was Antoninus himself, who had replaced the dismissed administrator, the already mentioned Bishop Malchus.
For the second time the Dalmatian Papal patrimony is mentioned in the letter of Pope Gregory addressed to Bishop John of Ravenna in July of 592. In the first part of the letter the Pope tells
the bishop of Ravenna about his conciliation with Bishop Natalis of Salona's (around 580 -592), and in the second one he demands Ravenna's bishop to force Bishop Malchus to render accounts about the administration of the patrimony in order to consider if he will entrust him again with its ad-ministration.43 From the letters that the same Pope was sending to the vicedeacon Antoninus, who substituted Bishop Malchus in the administration of the Dalmatian patrimony, it could be seen that the problem was in rendering accounts for the administration of the patrimony. The Pope also demanded that Antoninus send Bishop Malchus to Rome in order to render accounts.44 The same Pope sent the letter in March of 593 to the same vicedeacon Antoninus. In that letter the Pope addresses the vicedeacon Antoninus as administrator of the patrimony in Dalmatia (rector patrimonii in Dalmatia). On this occasion too, the Pope demands Antoninus to remind Bishop Malchus that he has the obligation to render accounts for the administration of the Papal patrimony (patrimo-nium nostrum) and to bring the revenues that he had collected.45 Malchus also had to justify himself for being accused of usurpation or alienation of the properties of Salona's church as well as of some other incriminating deeds.46
For the third time the Dalmatian Papal patrimony is mentioned in the letter of Pope Gregory, sent in March of 593 to his administrator vice-deacon Antoninus. This letter was sent because of the death of Salona's archbishop Natalis. The Pope, who was worried about the regularity of the election of Natalis's successor, ordered Antoni-
37	About the maritime routes: Brusic 1970, 549-568; Jurišic 2000, 47-59.
38	Saria 1954, 1673-1680; Kovačevic 1967, 242-243, 257; Hoxha 1993, 551-568.
39	Peters 2000, 105; Hoxha 2000, 69-88.
40	See: TIR, K 34, Carte historique et topographique.
41	Faralati 1769, 170; Mansi 1960, 1057; Migne 1849, lib. I, epist. XXXYIII (527); CCSL, CXL, I, 36 p. 43: "Gregorius Malcho Episcopo Dalmatiae. Iohannes vir eloquentissimus, consiliarius viri excellentissimi domini Georgii praefecti per Italiam, insinuavit nobis contra Stephanum, episcopum Scodrensis civitatis, quorumdam se negotiorum habere controversias, et petiit inter eum et se iudicium debere consistere. Propterea fraternitatem tuam praesenti praeceptione curavimus admonendam ut praedictum episcopum ad eligendum compellas venire iudicium. Et quicquid inter praedictum Iohannem virum magnificum et saepe fatum episcopum electorum fuerit sentetia definitum, ad effectum perducere non omittas, ut et actor de consecuta iustitia gratias referat ut pulsatus, cum ad cognitionem deducitur, nihil contra se de illata iniustitia conqueratur".
42	CCSL, CXL, II, 20, p. 107: "Praesentium igitur latorem, quem illic pro ipsa exigui patrimoniali administratione direximus, vestrae exelentiae commendamus".
43	CCSL, CXL, II, 38 p. 125: "Pro qua re fratrem et coepiscopum nostrum Malchum admone ut prius ad nos veniat, rationes suas ponat, et tunc demum alibi, ubi necesse est, proficiscatur, et si eius actus bonos cognoscimus, ei fortasse hoc ipsum patrimonium quod tenuit restituamus".
44	CCSL, CXL, II, 19 p. 107: "Malchum vero fratrem coepiscopumque nostrum curabis fideiussori committere, ut ad nos quantocius veniat, quatenus omni mora ac dilatione postposita, actionum suarum expositis ratiociniis, ad propria cum securitate valeat remeare".
45	CCSL, CXL, III, 22 p. 168: "Sed et hoc eum admonere curato ut adponendas explendasque rationes patrimonii nostri quod gessit debeat esse sollicitus".
46	CCSL, CXL, III, 22 p. 168: "Nam multa habere de rebus praedictae fertur ecclesiae, eumque opinio pene auctorem exstitisse in venditione rerum eius vel aliis illicitis asseverat".
nus to prevent simony and violation,47 to protect the properties of Salona's church and to prevent Bishop Malchus from intervening in the election of Salona's Archbishop.48 This confirms that the controversial Bishop Malchus quite probably stayed in Salona a year after he was removed from the post of administrator of the Dalmatian Papal patrimony. In the same letter the vicedeacon Antoninus was for the first time addressed by the same Pope as the administrator of Papal possessions in Dalmatia (rector patrimonii in Dalmatia). The administrators of the Papal possessions took the title of rectors after the reforming of the administration of the Papal patrimony by Pope Gregory.49 The same letter shows that the administrator of the Dalmatian Papal patrimony was also the Pope's direct official as well as his representative in the Salonitan or Dalmatian church. The same fact can be concluded from three letters of Pope Gregory: the first sent in April of 594 to Maximus, the self-proclaimed Archbishop of Salona (592-599),50 the second to the Byzantine queen Constantina in June of 595,51 and the third to Bishop Sabinianus of Iader in December of 5 9 7.52 In this context, it could be understood that the administrators of the
Dalmatian Papal patrimony had great authority in comparison to that of Salona's archbishops. This authority included the possibility of denying pali-um to Salona's archbishops, but also the right to forbid them to celebrate the mass. This practically meant that the Salonitan archbishops could have been excluded from the Church.53 The administrators of the Dalmatian Papal possessions were entrusted with other delicate duties, such as, settling accounts between the Bishop of Scodra and the counsellor of the prefect for Italy, or reinstating the expelled Bishop of Epidaurus.54
In the letter sent in April of 593 to Salona's archdeacon Honoratus, Pope Gregory mentions the Dalmatian patrimony for the fourth time. Confirming to the archdeacon Honoratus his liberation from the accusations that had been brought against him, addressed to Pope Pelagius I and to Pope Gregory himself, the Pope informs the archdeacon about the commands that were issued to the administrator of the patrimony of The Holy Roman Church in Dalmatia, the vicedeacon Antoninus. The orders included the investigation into the accusations for alienating the plate of Salo-na's church.55 According to the letter that the same
47	CCSL, CXL, III, 22 p. 167: "Illud quidem prae omnibus curae tibi sit ut in hac electione nec datio quibuscumque modis interveniat praemiorum, nec quarumlibet personarum patrocinia convalescant. Nam si quorumdam patrocinio fuerit quisquam electus, volunta-tibus eorum cum fuerit obedire ordinatus, reverentia exigente, compellitur, sicque fit ut et res illius minuantur ecclesiae, et ordo eccle-siasticus non servetur".
48	CCSL, CXL, III, 22 p. 167: "De rebus vero vel ornamento eiusdem ecclesiae fideliter rerum inventarium facito te praesente conscribi. Et ne rebus ipsis possit aliquid deperire, Respectum diaconum atque Stephanum primicerium notariorum ut ipsarum rerum omnino gerant custodiam admoneto, interminans eis de propria eos satisfacturos esse substantia, si quicquam exinde eorum neglegentia fuerit imminutum.Malchum autem fratrem et coepiscopum nostrum contestari te volumus, ut se penitus in hac causa non misceat. Nam si per eum aliquid contra voluntatem nostram factum vel temptatum potuerimus addiscere, non modicam ad se culpam et periculum pertinere cognoscat".
49	Spearing 1918, pass.; Bertolini 1952, 957.
50	CCSL, CXL, IV, 20 p. 238: "Quia igitur sine ullius exempli forma violasti talem tantamque sacerdotii dignitatem, praecipimus ut, usque dum dominicis vel responsalis nostri cognoverimus apicibus quod non surrepticia sed vera fueris iussione ordinatus,..."
51	CCSL, CXL, V, 39 p. 317: "Ego autem praeceptioni pietatis eius obediens eidem Maximo, qui me nesciente ordinatus est, hoc quod in ordinatione sua me vel responsalem meum pratermittere praesumpsit, ita ex corde laxavi, ac si me auctore fuisset ordinatus".
52	CCSL, CXL A, VIII, 11 p. 529: "Nam responsali nostro omnino studiose mandavimus ut sollicitum cautumque se debeat exhibere".
53	CCSL, CXL, II, 19 p. 106: "Proinde experientiam tuam praesentis praecepti auctoritate duximus fulciendam, quatenus, coniungens in Salonam, Natalem fratrem coepiscopumque nostrum saltim tot scriptis admonitum studeat adhortari ut supra memoratum archidi-aconem in suo statim loco suscipiat. Quod si facere hoc contumaciter ut consuevit forte distulerit, usum ei pallii, qui ad hac sede concessus est, ex auctoritate sedis apostolicae cotradictio. Quem si, etiam amisso pallio, adhuc in eadem pertinacia perseverare per-spexeris, Dominici quoque corporis ac sanguinis eundem antistitem participatione privabis".
54	CCSL, CXL, III, 9 p. 157: "Pervenit ad nos Florentium Epidauritanae civitatis episcopum, praereptis prius rebus eius, pro quibus-dam non approbatis criminibus, sine sacerdotali concilio fuisse damnatum. Et quia non debet is poenam sustinere canonicam in cuius damnatione non est canonica prolata sententia, praecipimus experientiae tuae ut Natalli fratri et coepiscopo nostro debeas imminere, quatenus supradictum virum de eodem eici faciat quo nunc dicitur detrusus exsilio. Convocatoque episcoporum concilio, si haec in quibus accusatus est, ei canonice fuerint approbata, praefati Natalis fratris et coepiscopi nostri volumus in eum proprium robur obtinere sententiam. Sin autem generali fuerit iudicio absolutus, nec eum deinceps ciuslibet praeiudicio subiacere permittas, et praefatae res districta tuae sollicitudinis restituantur instantia. Necesse est ergo ut, quanto graviora talium negotiorum perpendis pondera, tanto ea maturiori vigilantiorique studeas exsecutione complere".
55	CCSL, CXL, III, 32 p. 178: "De his autem capitulis de quibus conquestus es Antonino subdiacono et rectori illic patrimonii sanctae cui Deo auctore praesidemus ecclesiae instanter ut iniunximus, siquidem in his ecclesiasticas invenerit immixtas esse personas, cum summa causas ipsas districtione atque auctoritate definiat. Sin autem cum talibus res agitur, in quos ecclesiasticae vigor non possit iurisdictionis extendi, de singulis quibusque capitulis probationes, inter publica gesta depositas, ad nos absque ulla dilatione transmi-tat, ut instructi subtiliter sciamus quid de his debeamus, Christo auxiliante disponere".
Pope in May/June of 598 sent to the Byzantine proconsul of Dalmatia (proconsul Dalmatiae) Marcellinus, the highly ranked representatives of the Byzantine authority in Dalmatia - Marcellinus himself among the others - were included in these dishonorable doings.56 Judging by the letter of Pope Gregory addressed to the vicedeacon Antoninus in March of 592, the investigation of this case was referred to the administrator of the Dalmatian Papal patrimony. This, by no means pleasant duty, once again emphasizes the great authority that the administrator of Dalmatian Papal patrimony disposed of at the time of Pope Gregory. The great authority of this Papal official is emphasized in the letter that was sent in July of 593 to the clergy of Salona's church by the same Pope on the occasion of the election of Salona's archdeacon Hon-oratus Archbishop of Salona. In this letter too, the Pope gives orders to vicedeacon Antoninus to stop Honoratus's adversaries, especially Bishop Malchus.57
The Dalmatian Papal patrimony is mentioned for the fifth time in the letter that Pope Gregory sent in September/October of 594 to the deacon Sabinianus. At the beginning of the letter, the Pope informs his deacon about the case of Maximus, the self-proclaimed Archbishop of Salona, who had no scrupules about committing the most cruel crimes in order to get the highest rank in Salona's church. The vicedeacon Antoninus, administrator of the Papal patrimony in Dalmatia, saved himself from death only by escaping.58 The vicedeacon's real reason for being anxious about his life could be read in the letter by the same Pope, sent in April of 594 to Maximus himself. The Pope directly accuses Maximus of the murders of Salona's priests, deacons and other members of Salona's Church who had not accepted Maximus as Salona's Archbishop.59
PAPAL POSSESSIONS IN ISTRIA
The patrimony of Istria is related to Papal possessions in Ravenna (Patrimonium Ravennate et Histrianum).'6^ On the basis of past investigations it is not possible to date precisely the time of its origin, its location and structure and its disappearance. It is not known if any great properties from the time of Antiquity - and in Istria there were plenty of them61 - became church property. Anyway, great properties existed in Istria in the late Roman period or from the time of the Emperor Constantine,62 for instance around Umag and Novigrad.63 The Byzantine army commander or the Istria regent (magister militum), who had his seat in Pula,64 also had his possessions near Novi-grad. Already in the 7th century they were cultivated by the Slavs and later they became the property of Franconia's official (dux Johannes).^^ From the available sources it cannot be seen if those were the properties that the Emperor Justinian donated to Ravenna's church at the time of the Archbishop Saint Maximius (546 -552) who originated from Pula, or from Saint Apollinaris' feud (de iure Sancti Apollinaris et Ecclesiae Ravennae).66
CONCLUSION
The correspondence of the Popes Vigilius and Gregory confirms the existance of Papal possessions about the middle and during the last decade of the 6th century around Scodra and Salona and in Istria. From the available sources it could not be seen when and how the Roman bishops obtained them. There is reason to believe that the methods of obtaining these possessions were the same as those which the Roman and local bishops were
56	CCSL, CXL A, IX, 159, p. 718: "Vos enim tanti mali de causa Maximi omnes astruunt auctores existere, per quos spoliatio illius ecclesiae vel tantarum animarum perditio atque inauditae praesumptionis audacia sumpsit initium".
57	CCSL, CXL, III, 46 p. 191: "Eos vero qui ab electionis vestrae unitate inconsiderate discordant, ut vobiscum sentire possint, ab Antonino subdiacono nostro fecimus admoneri. Cui etiam de persona Malchi, fratris et coepiscopi nostri, quod oporteat fieri iam pridem iniunximus. Sed quoniam et ipsi scripsimus, credimus eum ab inquietudine vestra sine mora quiescere. Qui si fortasse obedire quocum-que modo neglexerit, contumacia eius canonicae ultionis modis omnibus districtione multabitur".
58	CCSL, CXL, V, 6 p. 271: "Nam homines gloriosi viri Romani patricii, qui ab eo praemia acceperunt eumque ita ordinari fecerunt, Antonium, subdiaconem et rectorem patrimonii, nisi fugisset, occiderent".
59	CCSL, CXL, IV, 20 p. 238: "Additur inauditum nefas, quod post interdictionem quoque nostram, quae sub excommunicatione tua ordinantiumque te facta est, caesis presbyteris, diaconibus ceteroque clero, manu militari diceris ad medium deductus".
60	Bertolini 1952, 958.
61	Starac 1994, 133-145.
62	Ammian. Marcel., 14, 11, 20.
63	Matijašic 1996, 186, 187.
64	Benussi 2002, 78-80, 82.
65	Marušic 1958-1959, 216; Ujčic 1997, 225.
66	Benussi 2002, 82-84.
using elsewhere. These possessions were also very important bonds in the chain of Papal patrimony, which is indicated by the fact that persons very close to the Pope were appointed their administrators. The administrator of the Dalmatian Papal possessions was entrusted by Pope Vigilius with collecting revenue from the Praevalitan patrimony too. The destination of this Papal official was Salona, which could be indicative of the fact that at that time the Dalmatian patrimony itself was not too far from Salona. In addition to administering the Papal patrimony in Dalmatia, this Papal official was also its representative in the local church, above all in Salona's church.
Dalmatian and Praevalitan patrimonies were mentioned several times in the correspondence of the Popes Vigilius and Gregory. Pope Gregory reorganized the administration of all Papal possessions. These officials were headed by special officials (rectores patrimonii sancti Petri) directly subordinate to the Roman bishop's notary (primic-
erius notariorum, notarius). They were entrusted with very delicate tasks such as supervising the ordainment of local clergy, electing the local bishop, controlling the property of local churches, resolving disputes between local bishops, between bishops and state officials and others. About the middle and during the last decade of the 6th century the Dalmatian patrimony was headed by the Pope's deacon, Bishop Malchus and the Pope's vicedea-con. Even if they were from low ranking church officials, the administrators of Papal patrimonies, as the Pope's officials, had great authority in relation to Dalmatian bishops.
The available sources do not mention Papal possessions in the eastern Adriatic from the end of the 6th century. However, this does not mean that they did not exist. It is probable that in the time of Pope John IV (640-642) revenues from Dalmatian as well as from Istrian Papal patrimonies were used to ransom slaves (pro redemptione captivorum) from Avars and Slavs in Dalmatia and Istria.
AMMIANI MARCELLINI, Rerum gestarum libri qu supersunt (Ed. J. C. Rolfe). - London, Camridge Mass., 1956.
ANTOLJAK, S. 1992, Hrvati u prošlosti. Izabrani radovi (Croats in the Past. Selected Articles). - Split.
BENUSSI, B. 2002, Povijest Pule u svjetlu municipalnih ustanova do 1918. godine (Riassunto: Pola nelle sue instituzioni municipali sino al 1918, 763-776; Zusammenfassung: Pula und seine städtischen Einrichtungen bis zum Jahre 1918, 777-791). - Pula.
BERTOLINI, O. 1952, Patrimonio di san Pietro. - In : Encic-lopedia cattolica IX, 958-959, Citta del Vaticano.
BRUSIC, Z. 1970, Problemi plovidbe Jadranom u prethistoriji i antici (Summary: Navigation in the Adriatic in Prehistory and Ancient Times, 565-568). - Pomorski zbornik 8, 549568.
BULIC, F. 1904, S. Gregorio Magno papa nelle sue relazioni colla Dalmazia (a. 590.-604.). - Supplemento al: Bulletino di archeologia e storia dalm. 27, 17-47.
CCSL, CXL: Corpus Christianorum Series Latina, Volume CXL. S. Gregorii Magni Registrum epistularum, Libri I-VII. (ed.: Dag Norbert). - Tvrnholti (Belgien) MCMLXXXII.
CCSL, CXL-A: Corpus Christianorum Series Latina, Volume CXL-A. S. Gregorii Magni Rergistrum epistularum, Libri VIII-XIV, Apendix. (ed. Dag Norberg). - Tvrnholti (Belgien), MCMLXXXII.
DUCHESNE, L. 1955, Liber pontificalis I. - Paris.
DUFFY, E. 1999, Die Päpste. Die große illustrierte Geschichte. - München.
FABRE, P. 1892, De patrimoniis romanae ecclesiae usque ad aetatem Carolinorum. - Proponebat Paul Fabre, Insulae.
FARLATI, D. 1753, Illyrici sacri tomus secundus. Ecclesia Salonitana. A quarto saeculo aere christianae usque ad ex-idium Salonae. Accessere Vita Diocletiani Imperatoris, Acta Sanctorum ex ejus genere, Marmora Salonitana. - Auctore Daniele FARLATO presbytero Societatis Jesu, Venetiis, MDCCLIII.
FARLATI, D. 1769, Illyrici sacri tomus quartus. Ecclessiae suffraganeae metropolis Spalatensis. - Auctore Daniele Far-lato presbytero Societatis Jesu, Venetiis MDCCLXIX.
GATZ, E. 1997, Kirchenstaat. - In: Lexikon für Theologie und Kirche 6, 58-62, Freiburg, Basel, Rom, Wien.
GRISAR, H. 1877, Ein Rundgang durch die Patrimonien des Heiligen Stuhles um das Jahr 600. - Zeitschrift für katholische Theologie 1, 321-360.
GUNJAČA, S. 1973, Ispravci i dopune starijoj hrvatskoj histo-riji. Knjiga I. Izvori (analiza i kritika) [Corrections and the Supplements to the Older Croatian History. Vol. I. Sources (Analysis and Critics)]. - Zagreb.
HAMMAN, A. 1992, Patrimony of St Peter. - Encyclopedia of the Early Church II, Cambridge.
HOXHA, G. 1993, Shkodra - chef-lieu de la province Prevali-tane. - XL Corso di cultura sull'arte ravennate e bizantina, 551-568, Ravenna,.
HOXHA, G. 2000, Procesi i kristianizimit ne provincen e Prevalit deri ne fillimet e shekullit VII (Summary: The Process of Christianization in the Province of Praevalis Until the Beginning of the 7th Century, 88). - In: Krishterimi nder Shqiptare. Christianity among the Albanians. International Symposium Tirana, November 16-19. November 1999, 69-88, Skoder.
IVANISEVIC, M. 1994, Povijesni izvori (Die Geschichtsquellen, 189-195). - In: Salona christiana, 105-195, Split.
JURISIC, M. 2000, Ancient Shipwrecks of the Adriatic. Maritime transport during the first and second centuries AD. - BAR Int. Ser. 828.
KLAIC, N. 1967, Historia Salonitana maior. - Posebna izdanja Srpske akademije nauka i umetnosti knj. CCCXCIX, Odel-jenje društvenih nauka, knj. 55, Begorad.
KOVAČEVIC, J. 1967, Crna Gora u doba Rimskog Carstva. -In: Istorija Crne Gore, knjiga prva Od najstarijih vremena do kraja XII vijeka [Montenegro in the Roman Times. History of Montenegro, vol I. From the Earliest Times until the End of 12 Century], 143-278, Titograd.
KRÄNZLEIN A. 1965, Patrimonium. - In: Pauly Realencyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft. Neue Bearbeitung. Suppl. X, 493-502.
MANSI J. D. 1960, Sacrorum conciliorum nova et amplissima collectio cujus Joannes Dominicus Mansi et post ipsius mortem Florenti-nus et Venetianus editores ab anno 1758 ad annum 1798, prio-res triginta unum tomos eddiderunt nunc autem continuata, et Deo favente absoluta. Vol. 9, 10, (ed. secunda). - Graz.
MARASOVIC, T. and M. ZEKAN 1982, Istraživanje srednjov-jekovne crkve Sv. Mihovila "Na obali" u Splitu (Summary: Excavation of the Early Mediaeval Church of Sv. Mihovil (Michael) "in ripa maris" in Split, 125-126). - Starohrv. pros. III/2, 111-126.
MARIJANOVIC, I. 1990, Prilog problemu datiranja nekih starokšcanskih crkava u Bosni i Hercegovini (Summary: A Contribution to the Problem of Dating of some Early Christian Churches in Bosnia and Herzegovina, 135-136). - Glas. Zem. muz. 45, 109-136.
MARINI, G. 1805, I papiri diplomatici. - Roma.
MARUŠIC, B. 1958-1959, Zgodnjesrednjeveško grobišče v Čelegi pri Novem gradu v Istri. - Arh. vest. 9-10 195-219.
MATIJAŠIC, R. 1996, Nomenclatura oeconimica antičke istre. Nazivi poljodjelskih zanimanja i dužnosti u antičkoj Istri (Summary: Economic nomenclature of Roman Istria. The terms for the agricultural professions and duties in Roman Istria, 188). - Arh. rad. raspr. 12, 171-188.
MATIJAŠIC, R. 1998, La presenza imperiale nell'economia dell'Istria romana e nel contesto Adriatico. - Histria antiqua 4, 15-22.
MERCIER, J. 2001, Povijest Vatikana [History of Vatican]. - Zagreb.
MIGNE, J. P. 1848, Patrologiae cursus completus sive bibliothe-ca universalis, integra, uniformis, commoda, oeconomica, omnium ss. Patrum, doctorum scriptorumque ecclestiasticorum qui ab aevo apostolico ad Inocentii III tempora floruerunt. Tomus LXIX. Magni Aurelii Cassiodori senatoris, viri patricii, con-sulares, et vivarensis oblatis opera omnia. Praecedunt Vigilii papae, Gildae Sapientis et Pelagii papae scripta universa. -Parisii.
MIGNE, J. P. 1849, Patrologiae cursus completus sive bibliothe-ca universalis, integra, uniformis, commoda, oeconomica, omnium ss. Patrum, doctorum scriptorumque ecclestiasticorum qui ab aevo apostolico ad Inocentii III tempora floruerunt. Tomus 77. Sancti Gregorii Papae I cognomenta Magni, Opera omnia. Accurante Jacques Paul Migne. Tomus tertius. - Pari-sii.
MIRKOVIC, M. 1978, Antistes Stefanus i gradevinska delatn-ost Justinijanova vremena u Polimlju (Summary: Antistes Stefanus and building activity in Polimlje in the time of Justinian, 7-8). - Zbornik radova Vizantološkog instituta [Recueil des travaux de l'Institut d'etudes byzatines] 18, 1-8.
MOCSY, A. 1974, Pannonia and Upper Moesia. A History of the Middle Danube Provinces of the Roman Empire. - London, Boston.
NIKOLAJEVIC, I. 1971, Veliki posed u Dalmaciji u V i VI veku u svetlosti arheoloških nalaza (Resume: Le grand do-maine en Dalmatie aux Ve et VIe siecles a la lumiere des recherches archeologiques, 288-289). - Zbornik radova Vizantološkog instituta [Recueil des travaux de l'Institut d'etudes byzantines] 13, 284-292.
NOBLE, T. F. X. 1993, Patrimonium Sancti Petri. - In: Lexikon des Mittelalters VI, 1791-1793, München, Zürich.
PETERS, M. W. E. 2000, Die ekklesiale Geographie Albaniens bis zum Ende des 6. Jahrhunderts. Beiträge der christlichen Archäologie auf dem Territorium der heutigen Re-
publik Albanien. - In: Krishterimi nder Shqiptare. Christianity among the Albanians. International Symposium Tirana, November 16-19. November 1999, 100-119, Skoder.
SARIA, B. 1954, Praevalitana. - In: Paulys Realencyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft. Neue Bearbeitung 44, 1673-1680.
SPEARING, E. 1918, The Patrimony of the Roman Church in the Time of Gregory the Great. - Cambridge.
SREJOVIC, D. 1983, Gamzigrad - Kasnoantički carski dvorac (Summary: Gamzigrad. An Imperial Palace of the Late Classical Times, 193-201). - Galerija Srpske akademije nauka i umetnosti 45, Beograd.
SREJOVIC, D. 1989, Felix Romuliana. Galerijeva palača u Gamzigradu (Felix Romuliana. Galerius'Palast in Gamzigrad).
-	Beograd.
STARAC, A. 1994, Carski posjedi u Histriji (Summary: Imperial lands in Histria, 145). - Opusc. arch. 18, 133-145.
STARAC, A. 1999, Rimsko vladanje u Histriji i Liburniji. Društveno i pravno uredenje prema literarnoj, natpisnoj i arheološkoj gradi.
-	Histrija I, Pula.
ŠIŠIC, F. 1914, Priručnik izvora hrvatske historije, dio I. čest 1 (do god. 1107.) [ Textbook of the Sources to the Croatian History. Vol. I, Part. 1 (Until the Year 1107.]. - Zagreb.
ŠKEGRO, A. 1999, Gospodarstvo rimske provincije Dalmacije (Zusammenfassung: Die Wirtschaft der römischen Provinz Dalmatien, 329-346). - Zagreb.
ŠKEGRO, A. 2000, Bergbau der römischen Provinz Dalma-tien. - God. Cent. balk. isp. XXXI/29, 53-176.
ŠKEGRO, A. 2000a, Duvanjski prostori u antici (Summary: The Duvno territory in the antiquity, 113). - In: Duvanjski zbornik. Zbornik radova s medunarodnoga znanstvenog sku-pa "Duvanjski kraj krozpovijest", Tomislavgrad, 6. - 7. srpnja 2000., 79-113, Tomislavgrad, Zagreb.
ŠKEGRO, A. 2000b, Je li rimski Delminij bio biskupsko sje-dište? (Summary: Was the Roman Delminium a bishop's residence?, 83-85). - Povijesni prilozi 19, 9-86.
ŠKEGRO, A. 2001, Papinski patrimonij u Dalmaciji (Summary: Patrimony of St. Peter in Dalmatia, 171). - Bosna fran-ciscana. Časopis Franjevačke teologije Sarajevo IX/14, 147171.
ŠKEGRO, A. 2001a, Patrimony of St. Peter in Dalmatia. - Povijesni prilozi 21, 9-28.
ŠKEGRO, A. 2001b, Upravitelj dobara Salonitanske crkve (Summary: Procurator Ecclesiae Salonitanae, 28). - Povijesni prilozi 22, 19-28.
ŠKEGRO, A. 2002, Na rubu opstanka. Duvanjska biskupija od utemeljenja do uključenja u Bosanski apostolski vikarijat (Summary: On the Edge of Survival. Diocese of Duvno from the time of its founding till incorporation into Apostolic vicariate of Bosnia). - Zagreb.
ŠKEGRO, A. 2002a, Procuraor Ecclesiae Salonitanae. - God. Cent. balk. isp. XXXII/30, 407-417.
UJČIC, Ž. 1997, Prilog poznavanju ranokršcanskog i ranos-rednjovjekovnog groblja u Novigradu (Riassunto: Contri-butio alla conoscenza del cimitero paleochristiano ed alto medievale di Novigrad, 226-227). - In: Arheološka istraživanja u Istri, Izd. Hrv. arh. dr. 18, 217-234.
VULIC, N. 1931, Antički spomenici naše zemlje [Ancient monuments of our land]. - Spomenik Srpske kraljevske akademije LXXI, Beograd.
VULIC, N. 1941-1948, Antički spomenici naše zemlje [Ancient Monuments of our land]. - Spomenik Srpske akademije nauka i umetnosti 98, Beograd.
WILKES, J. J. 1969, Dalmatia. - London.
Papinski posjedi na istočnom jadranskom području
Sažetak
Papinski su posjedi na istočnojadranskom području predstavljali značajnu kariku u lancu posjeda rimskih biskupa (pa-trimonium sancti Petri) kojima su raspolagali još od razvijene antike diljem Italije, po Siciliji, Korzici, Sardiniji, Galiji, sje-vernoj Africi i dr. Unatoč činjenici da se spominju više puta u korespondenciji papa Yigilija (537.-555.) i Grugura I. Yelikog (590.-604.), u znanosti su ostali gotovo nezapaženi. Spominju se kao Patrimonium sancti Petri odnosno Patrimonium Sanctae ecclesiae. Pod pojmom patrimonium podrazumijevali su se veci zemljišni kompleksi najčešce u carskom a potom u crkvenom odnosno papinskom vlasništvu. Papinski se patrimonij, sudeci po dosadašnjim istraživanjima, takoder sastojao od vecih zem-ljišnih kompleksa, sakralnih, stambenih, gospodarskih i drugih objekata. Najčešce je nastajao darovnicama. Medu najvece darovatelje spadali su pojedini rimski i bizantski carevi kao i drugi imucnici. Poput rimskih i bizantskih careva, i rimski su pape od patrimonija razasutog diljem nekadašnjeg Rimskog Carstva ubirali rentu (pensiones) posredstvom svojih činovni-ka koji su im bili na čelu (procuratores). Na istočnojadranskim prostorima papinski se patrimonij spominje oko provincijal-nog i crkvenog središta Scodre u Prevalitani, na širem salonit-anskom području u Dalmaciji gdje je najčešce i boravio njegov upravitelj (rector) te na području Istre. Istarski papinski patrimonij dovodi se u vezu s papinskim ravenskim posjedima (patrimonium Ravennate et Histrianum). Temeljem dosadašnjih istraživanja nije moguce precizirati vrijeme njegovog postanka, lokaciju, strukturu, nestanak i dr.
Kada su i na koji način rimski biskupi sticali patrimonij na istočnojadranskim prostorima iz raspoložive se izvorne grade
ne može razaznati. Nema, medutim, razloga ne vjerovati da su u pitanju bile iste metode kojima su rimski biskupi posjede sticali i drugdje, odnosno kako su do njih dolazili i mjesni biskupi. I ovi su posjedi bili značajne spone u lancu papinskih posjeda, na što upozorava i činjenica da su za njihove upravitelje pos-tavljane osobe iz najužeg papinog kruga. Upravitelju papinskih dalmatinskih posjeda papa Yigilije je povjeravao ubiranje prihoda i od prevalitanskog patrimonija. Odredište tog papi-nog činovnika bila je Salona, iz čega bi se dalo naslutiti da ni sam dalmatinski patrimonij u to vrijeme nije bio previše udal-jen od ovog grada. Osim što mu je bila povjerena uprava nad papinskim patrimonijem u Dalmaciji, ovaj je papinski činov-nik ujedno bio i njegovim predstavnikom u mjesnoj, ponajpri-je Salonitanskoj crkvi.
Od kraja 6. stoljeca raspoloživa vrela više ne spominju pa-pinske posjede na istočnojadranskim prostorima. No, to ne znači da ih više nije bilo. Nije isključeno da su, primjerice, prihodi i od papinog dalmatinskog i histarskog patrimonija za pape Ivana IY. (640.-642.) korišteni i za otkup roblja (pro redemptione captivorum) iz avarsko-slavenskih ruku po Dalmaciji i Istri i dr.
Dr. Ante Škegro Hrvatski institut za povijest Opatička 10 HR-10000 Zagreb askegro@misp.isp.hr